From: Andrea Righi <arighi@nvidia.com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: David Vernet <void@manifault.com>,
Changwoo Min <changwoo@igalia.com>,
Emil Tsalapatis <emil@etsalapatis.com>,
sched-ext@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH sched_ext/for-7.3-fixes] sched_ext: Don't report a forced-idle CPU as open for IMMED tasks
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2026 23:30:51 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <atPpCyLMK3rnvNqF@gpd4> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <49d76a6ae49b2e0d5359edc831ffaf60@kernel.org>
Hi Tejun,
On Sat, Oct 17, 2026 at 10:36:19AM -1000, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello, Andrea.
>
> On Sat, Oct 17, 2026 at 02:47:49PM +0200, Andrea Righi wrote:
> > +static bool higher_class_runnable(struct rq *rq)
> > +{
> > + if (sched_stop_runnable(rq))
> > + return true;
> > +
> > + /* The ext server selects SCX tasks ahead of RT and fair tasks. */
> > + if (sched_dl_runnable(rq))
> > + return rb_first_cached(&rq->dl.root) != &rq->ext_server.rb_node;
> > +
> > + return sched_rt_runnable(rq) || sched_fair_runnable(rq);
> > +}
>
> This duplicates the core pick order in sched_ext, the dl_server ordering
> included, which is brittle. It also misses the case where the IMMED
> task's own cookie forces the CPU idle, e.g. a tagged IMMED task while
> the sibling runs an untagged RT task, as nothing above ext is runnable
> on the CPU itself.
Ah, right, a tagged IMMED task inserted on a CPU whose sibling runs an
untagged SCHED_FIFO task stays parked on the local DSQ with this patch
applied, which is wrong.
>
> Instead of predicting the pick, how about reacting to it? A CPU picking
> idle with IMMED tasks on its local DSQ means that they didn't run
> immediately, whatever the reason. scx_update_idle() is already called on
> every idle pick, from set_next_task_idle() on a task to idle switch and
> from pick_task_idle() on an idle to idle re-pick, so maybe something
> like the following in __scx_update_idle()?
>
> if (idle && unlikely(rq->scx.nr_immed))
> scx_schedule_reenq_local(rq, SCX_REENQ_...);
>
> Outside forced idle, nr_immed should be zero there as pick_task_scx()
> would have taken the local DSQ head. The reenq would need a flag telling
> reenq_local() to skip rq_is_open(), as next_class is idle and the rq
> would look open, keeping the IMMED task at the head.
Yeah, makes sense and it looks like a much more robust approach. I'll
send a new version that drops higher_class_runnable() and does this,
with an internal SCX_REENQ_IDLE_PICK (?) flag to make reenq_local() skip
rq_is_open().
Thanks for taking a look at this!
-Andrea
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-17 21:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-17 12:47 Andrea Righi
2026-10-17 20:36 ` Tejun Heo
2026-10-17 21:30 ` Andrea Righi [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=atPpCyLMK3rnvNqF@gpd4 \
--to=arighi@nvidia.com \
--cc=changwoo@igalia.com \
--cc=emil@etsalapatis.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sched-ext@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=void@manifault.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®